[hungerstrike]

The definition of empirical is: “based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.”

Was there a salient point that you were trying to make or are you just going to continue to misrepresent definitions of words that you can easily look up for yourself?

[waivek]

Oh my god. Are you serious? This entire debate and your source has been the Oxford dictionary? The Oxford dictionary?

Empiricism is a view of epistemology, that cannot be reduced to a definition in the Oxford dictionary.

If you look at the link below, you'll see just how murky the field of empiricism is.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-empiricism/#EmpVe...

I'm sorry for assuming you were speaking with any depth when talking about empiricism. If your base entire arguments on dictionary definitions then it's no surprise this conversation is going in circles.

[dang]

This is the sort of boring tit-for-tat flamewar that we don't want here, and that ultimately ends up with people yelling uncivilly at each other. Please don't do this again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[hungerstrike]

Pointing out the simple, obvious definition is still better than any argument that you’ve made about anything here, IMO.

I’d love to hear you make an argument that will shed light on things from your knowledge of the “murky the field of empiricism” though. Let’s hear it!

So far all of you’ve done is point out what it is. I don’t think you really explained how it helps your case at all. How does it invalidate the easily observable fact that you can see plenty of people leaving reviews for apps that they are just fine with?

You said people don’t leave those types of reviews but there they are. So what are you going to say that makes them somehow disappear? Really, I’d like to understand. Do we really need Plato though to explore this? I think if you really understand something you should be able to explain in pretty simple terms.